Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat
Kudos,
CP
Wouldn't something like this be more appropriate in a PM?
(http://www.yourtrainerpaige.com/wp-content/uploads/2014/02/pinkman-what.gif)
Eh maybe, maybe not
If someone is openly critical, why can't I be openly supportive
Besides, I'm anonymous so what could happen
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 11:04:26 PM
Besides, I'm anonymous so what could happen
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/211/481/1322884994202.jpg)
This article (http://www.allaboutthegames.co.uk/feature_story.php?article_id=9135) describes something that happened in a gaming community that I'm a part of. Long story short, teh intarnetz r srs bznz.
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on May 06, 2014, 11:34:38 PM
(http://i1.kym-cdn.com/photos/images/original/000/211/481/1322884994202.jpg)
This article (http://www.allaboutthegames.co.uk/feature_story.php?article_id=9135) describes something that happened in a gaming community that I'm a part of. Long story short, teh intarnetz r srs bznz.
You're the real killer aren't you?
Quote from: Hijiri Byakuren on May 06, 2014, 11:42:22 PM
Not funny.
I do apologize, and I mean it. To me humor is a way of coping with the absolute insanity I see in the world. For that reason I may joke about topics most would consider not funny at all. I'm use to offending people, but usually they are people who deserve it in some way. From your reaction I understand that this has personal significance to you, and I'm sorry for any hurt that may have been caused.
Quote from: The Skeletal Atheist on May 07, 2014, 01:13:46 AM
I do apologize, and I mean it. To me humor is a way of coping with the absolute insanity I see in the world. For that reason I may joke about topics most would consider not funny at all. I'm use to offending people, but usually they are people who deserve it in some way. From your reaction I understand that this has personal significance to you, and I'm sorry for any hurt that may have been caused.
Thank you, I accept your apology.
It probably doesn't have the same personal significance to me as it does some other members of that gaming community. But still, I did know the guy, and I loved his work. The point of me bringing it up is that one minute, people take for granted that you're anonymous on the internet. Then the next thing you know, someone gets stabbed 80 times because of a little tiff on a forum.
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat
Kudos,
CP
O0 Thank you kindly CP, I appreciate the kudos.
Op, what you're missing is that Aristotelian theories were intellectually stimulating
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat
Kudos,
CP
His philosophy is already published in huge quantities. New ageism can be found in every online/offline bookstore.
Yeah, by all means. Barnes and Noble is waiting with bated breath. Bated with what I'm not sure. Possibly bacon.
Casparov an era? The Roman Empire was an era. Casparov is a hiccup on the cusp of reality. I was an English major so I understand what I just wrote.
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat
Sorry to hear that you were not able to understand the conversation that occurred between Casaprov and the rest of the forum. I assure you, and from what everyone else is saying I'm sure they would agree, that there wasn't a single intellectually stimulating idea present in the entire history of conversations. If something stimulating had been brought up we could have designed an experiment around it and tested it for ourselves. What actually happened was a very long and drawn out physics lesson given to someone who, not only isn't interested in understanding and carrying out physics experiments but also believes he is an expert on the topic. So much of an expert that he thinks he is able to form correct conclusions from data he never acquired or would know how to acquire and theories he doesn't understand.
Any discussion with huge walls of text and big words can look intellectually stimulating but in most cases it doesn't even make sense. For example:
Casprov:
"You seem to think that I am arguing that "reality doesn't exist" or "reality isn't real", but I'm not. Of course it's real! Of course it exists! It's just isn't as the Realist describes it. Realism is false and Materialism is false, this does not mean that nothing is real, only that the nature of reality is not as you believe it to be."
This doesn't stop him from attempting to use experiments that depend on the universe being material to prove that materialism is false. See the irony? He sure doesn't. When confronted with this, instead of actually addressing the problem we get this gem:
Casprov:
"Science is a method of asking questions, not a set of reality assumptions. Scientists are entitled to ask if what could be actually is so. The only constraint is that the question be decided by feedback gathered from the world by an accepted research method. Science does not require an objective world, only information to test theories against, which a Virtual Reality can easily provide. Not only can science accommodate the virtual world concept, a virtual world could also sustain science."
Which is ironic in a way because in this instance we have a non-scientist, philosophy layperson telling a scientist how science "actually works". He also made the assumption that virtual reality can be built on a subjective reality without outlining the anything in code. How he is going to prove this has yet to be seen as any virtual reality ever constructed has an architecture of programming outlining the objective reality. It goes on and on.
I'm sure other people on this forum can give better examples, that's just the one I was drawn to recently for it's stupidity.
The only reason that Casparov attracts attention on this forum is that he is easily the chew toy of many members. Otherwise, he would be totally ignored.
Casparov is just like a conspiracy theorist. Regardless of the fact that learned men in the fields he chooses to debate in don't agree with his philosophy, he has so convinced himself he is right he refuses to accept anything outside his view that would disprove it.
Quoteintellectually stimulating
So is listening to a toddler preach to morons. Oh my bad! I'm not being PC. :wall: Solitary
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
A lot of Aristotelian theories are incorrect but are still intellectually stimulating, and just seeing all the posts about your views on the forum leads me to believe your views would really shake the boat
Kudos,
CP
Are you high?
Does Prozac count as being high?
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 07, 2014, 12:19:41 PM
Does Prozac count as being high?
Nope. Prozac don't produce hallucinations. I'm talking about your original post of this thread. Do you really think Casaprov ideas can be taken seriously?
I was joking about the Prozac, and I think he should be given respect because even if you don't like his points, they're still interesting (to me at least)
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 07, 2014, 12:48:50 PM
I was joking about the Prozac, and I think he should be given respect because even if you don't like his points, they're still interesting (to me at least)
Quantum mechanics is interesting. The Gish Gallop we get is not.
The biggest problem is that much of what occurs in QM is subject to interpretation as the underlying causes are not known.
For example, the process of measurement does something to the process under examination, but no one seems to know what that something is.... enter the lunatic fringe. The lunatic fringe will jump on that gap of knowledge and insert whatever makes them feel good. It's a god of the gaps argument and the new ageists like Casparov will use this tired old fallacy as if it's a brand new shiny argument.
Casparov is as interesting as a Deepak Chopra record, or any other fantasy, like Scripture is. Go for it Casparov, Deepak is making millions with his ridiculous fantasies. Solitary
Quote from: Berati on May 07, 2014, 01:05:20 PM
Quantum mechanics is interesting. The Gish Gallop we get is not.
The biggest problem is that much of what occurs in QM is subject to interpretation as the underlying causes are not known.
For example, the process of measurement does something to the process under examination, but no one seems to know what that something is.... enter the lunatic fringe. The lunatic fringe will jump on that gap of knowledge and insert whatever makes them feel good. It's a god of the gaps argument and the new ageists like Casparov will use this tired old fallacy as if it's a brand new shiny argument.
The argument from ignorance must be near the top of the list of most used fallacies. There's something about it that makes a compelling argument to a lot of people.
One thing I am smart enough not to do is "interpret" science and math. Not my bag, so I seek out sources that verify or back any argument I make. The entire dialogue, as I will say for the (5th) time, is he said, she said, yada not it don't say that yada quotes or vids or whatever from science sources.
And I don't engage in dialogue pretending to have any philosophic knowledge. I'm more Han Solo than Yoda. I research, I look up fact and sources to back my arguments. Those of you who have the patience, happy for you. I think it is boring. I prefer to cut to the chase and deal with issues through logic and evidence, silly me.
Casparov to me comes off as a half educated wind bag with an agenda, period. He refuses to accept counter arguments and stuck with a flawed viewpoint throughout, evidence notwithstanding. I don't respect him and I'm not going to pretend to.
Quote from: SGOS on May 07, 2014, 01:24:21 PM
The argument from ignorance must be near the top of the list of most used fallacies. There's something about it that makes a compelling argument to a lot of people.
I gave up trying to list all of them that he has made. You are correct, that is number one. Solitary
Quote from: stromboli on May 07, 2014, 01:46:29 PM
One thing I am smart enough not to do is "interpret" science and math. Not my bag, so I seek out sources that verify or back any argument I make. The entire dialogue, as I will say for the (5th) time, is he said, she said, yada not it don't say that yada quotes or vids or whatever from science sources.
And I don't engage in dialogue pretending to have any philosophic knowledge. I'm more Han Solo than Yoda. I research, I look up fact and sources to back my arguments. Those of you who have the patience, happy for you. I think it is boring. I prefer to cut to the chase and deal with issues through logic and evidence, silly me.
Casparov to me comes off as a half educated wind bag with an agenda, period. He refuses to accept counter arguments and stuck with a flawed viewpoint throughout, evidence notwithstanding. I don't respect him and I'm not going to pretend to.
He really makes me miss Eve. At least she had some pretty good arguments that took awhile to see where the fallacies lie. Solitary
Quote from: stromboli on May 07, 2014, 01:46:29 PM
One thing I am smart enough not to do is "interpret" science and math. Not my bag, so I seek out sources that verify or back any argument I make. The entire dialogue, as I will say for the (5th) time, is he said, she said, yada not it don't say that yada quotes or vids or whatever from science sources.
And I don't engage in dialogue pretending to have any philosophic knowledge. I'm more Han Solo than Yoda. I research, I look up fact and sources to back my arguments. Those of you who have the patience, happy for you. I think it is boring. I prefer to cut to the chase and deal with issues through logic and evidence, silly me.
Casparov to me comes off as a half educated wind bag with an agenda, period. He refuses to accept counter arguments and stuck with a flawed viewpoint throughout, evidence notwithstanding. I don't respect him and I'm not going to pretend to.
(http://img2.wikia.nocookie.net/__cb20111115025910/victorious/images/0/0d/Clapping_People.gif)
My only regret is that I have but one upvote to give.
*babble babble something something blah blah....
TOP THAT!
If the cosmos is consciousness like Casparov says, it's basically reduced to a methodical number-cruncher â€" a task more suited to a computer than a consciousness. If a consciousness like mine were in charge of the universe, we would have crazyawesome shit like this!
Sure, you have people transforming into monsters, but nobody would be bored.
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on May 07, 2014, 03:08:02 PM
If the cosmos is consciousness like Casparov says, it's basically reduced to a methodical number-cruncher â€" a task more suited to a computer than a consciousness. If a consciousness like mine were in charge of the universe, we would have crazyawesome shit like this!
Sure, you have people transforming into monsters, but nobody would be bored.
I have to say my fantasy universe trumps yours.
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q490/atheola/bikini003.jpeg)
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 11:04:26 PM
Eh maybe, maybe not
If someone is openly critical, why can't I be openly supportive
Besides, I'm anonymous so what could happen
Who says you can't? You obviously have and no one stopped you. Solitary
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on May 07, 2014, 03:24:34 PM
I have to say my fantasy universe trumps yours.
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q490/atheola/bikini003.jpeg)
Now that is too nice! Now cut it out! I'd sure like to know what Casparov's fantasy would look like. Here it is-------just a fantasy about God's mind. Solitary
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on May 07, 2014, 03:24:34 PM
I have to say my fantasy universe trumps yours.
(http://i1160.photobucket.com/albums/q490/atheola/bikini003.jpeg)
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=wK9odsWwfIo
Quote from: AllPurposeAtheist on May 07, 2014, 03:24:34 PM
I have to say my fantasy universe trumps yours.
I didn't say it was a
fantasy universe, now did I? :razz:
If you entered my fantasy universe, you would run screaming for the door. But it wouldn't help. The door would vanish after you entered.
If someone can't tell the difference between their fantasies and reality---what does that say about them? Solitary
Quote from: stromboli on May 08, 2014, 11:14:28 AM
If you entered my fantasy universe, you would run screaming for the door. But it wouldn't help. The door would vanish after you entered.
Your fantasy universe lacks masked superheroes that get their power from fresh produce. It is automatically inferior.
Q. E. Fuckin'-D!
Strom. :pai: Its OK! Solitary
Quote from: Hakurei Reimu on May 08, 2014, 11:46:10 AM
Your fantasy universe lacks masked superheroes that get their power from fresh produce. It is automatically inferior. Q. E. Fuckin'-D!
Meh. Not impressed. I have actually killed and skinned animals. I know how. Old school horrors unknown since medieval ages await within....
Casparov has done a good job of making me realized how a sense of humor has kept me from attempting suicide again. :eek: :pidu: :doh: :doh: :rotflmao: Solitary
This casaprov is funny I give him that.
Thousands of years from now anthropolgists will determine the Casaprov era never actually existed.
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
It's a character flaw in many religious individuals who feel it is honorable to "have faith" in what they believe in, even if it is potentially in error. You commend Casaprov for vehemently standing his ground as though this were a difficult task. In reality, it is far more difficult to change your stance when confronted with evidence that stands counter to your beliefs than it is to kick up dust and hope nobody notices you're wrong.
It's a shame that you try to play towards someone you perceive to be the "underdog" in hopes of finding a kindred spirit, when you've actually bought into someone who is irrational and poetic only in their manner of producing word salads. In short, you're too caught up in the pretty colors a person paints with words to realize there isn't any substance to what they've painted.
Quote from: Contemporary Protestant on May 06, 2014, 10:54:28 PM
Casaprov,
You should publish your philosophy because even though people disagree with you, it has caused a lot of discussion
That is not a mark of quality. People also discuss "Manos" The Hands of Fate, and that movie is the work of a total incompetent.